Bit victim blamey? And putting being attacked equal with being an attacker?

[JustBeyond]

That's my opinion, what do you think?

www.facebook.com/dorsetpolice/photos/a.718756231475885.1073741828.568402286511281/1618761368142029/?type=3

Qwertie, as others have commented on the thread, walking alone while drunk is an issue for people who are more likely to get lost or get into accidents (hit by a vehicle, fall into water), and it is sadly quite common to hear stories like this which end badly for men or women.

I must have missed the part on the poster where the 'walk home alone' comment was addressed only to women. (Likewise the comment about ignoring consent only being directed towards men...). There are places and times where it's dangerous for either men or women to be walking by themselves.
The poster never said that you should never walk alone, it asked if you would do it if you were sober - well, in all honesty, sometimes no I would not. Other times, absolutely I wouldn't think twice. The difference is that sometimes if you're drunk you might when you shouldn't.

Good point about putting at the same level the need if 'keeping yourself safe' and taking precautions and the totally illegal behaviours of some people (such as hitting another person or raping them), victims and perpetrators.

I also note that they do, in effect, refer to rape but are carefully avoiding the eyes avsctalking about not seeking consent.
Because it's put furward at the same time than 'not walking alone', it does minimize that behaviour 'as something you can be doing when you are drunk' rather the horrible and illegal act that rape or assault is.

ninja seri g that there's no mention of falling in the river or slipping etc and that is merely things that are let to imagine (and no I didn't think about any of those when I read the leaflet),
What about a simple
When you get drunk, you are more likely to have an accident?
Rather than 'not walking alone'?

Not walking alone is the advice given to women to avoid rape.
That's the one thing that came to my mind when I read the advert. Bit the risk of Injury or doing things that I wouldnt be doing.
Im sure most people would also read it that way TBH.

Ah so what you're saying is they should have one poster for men, one poster for women, one poster for victims and one for potential offenders.
Catchy.

Good point about an accident. When you are drunk, you are more likely to trip down the stairs in a nightclub, for eg.

Ok, so the advert days ...you wouldn't do this [bunch of behaviours] if you were sober, so don't do it when you are drunk.

You're reading it wrong. It's not a command, it's not even a suggestion. It's actually a question, ie:

If you were sober would you walk home at night alone?

The answer could be "actually, yes", "actually, no", or "I'm not sure".

As others have said it's requesting the reader to think about how drinking affects decision making.

A harbourside club in Bristol is starting to have people help escort drunk revellers safely navigate home because of the number of drownings of young pissed people walking home and ending up in the river.

When you've been drinking you pay less attention to your surroundings, see fewer dangers, take more risks and reaction times are slowed. That's why it's illegal to drink and drive and you'd probably be sacked for turning up to work pissed.

Don't walk home on your own when pissed in the dark is sound advice because of numerous reasons, the last one on the list is if you're a woman you might be attacked by a stranger because that's usually less likely than being hit by a car, falling over and injuring yourself, falling into a river, developing hypothermia etc.

Two young men I have known walked home alone after drinking. One died on the motorway, the other having fallen in a ditch by the side of the road.

It's probably good advice.

The poster doesn't exist in a vacuum; the language used and the choice of which messages are on it reinforce and echo previous posters and modes of thought that were straightforwardly victim blaming.

No, not victim blaming at all. Common sense and a reminder that many people both male and female, don't have it or lose it when under the influence of drink or drugs.

Okay so why not two posters

1 - when you are drunk you are more likely to offend - fight, assume or disregard consent, make poor decisions re driving etc

2 - when you are drunk, you are less aware of your surroundings/take more risks (etc) and more likely to have an accident or present an opportunity to an attacker

Mushing the two up (criminal and accident) makes the one look less bad and the other worse.

"Don't get paralytically drunk" is good advice, for all sorts of reasons.

But advice that seems to be about protecting yourself from rape or attack is dodgy because in truth there is nowhere you are safe from attack. You can be attacked in your own home by your own partner. You can be attacked, as an earlier poster was, on public transport and in broad daylight. You can be attacked by a work colleague or a relative or someone you thought was a friend. The only workable advice you can give someone to avoid being raped is basically never to leave the house and never under any circumstances have any contact with men. Even then, you're not 100% guaranteed safe.

It cannot be compared to wearing a seat belt. Wearing a seat belt does not restrict your freedom. Wearing a seat belt is equally advised to both men and women. The advice to wear a seat belt does not compound the victim blaming culture that expects women to be ever vigilant against the roaming rapists.

The only workable advice you can give someone to avoid being raped is basically never to leave the house and never under any circumstances have any contact with men. Even then, you're not 100% guaranteed safe.

That is not really "workable" though. Cuts into personal freedoms way to greatly. Other bits of advice like not leaving drinks unattended or walk at night drunk might not do so as severely.

To my mind the important factors in assessing a piece of safety advice is (a) whether it actually does reduce risks and (b) would the following of it impinge personal freedoms too greatly.

If other people wish to decide that something is "victim blaming" or "sends out messages" or this that and the other, that is unfortunate. But genuine good advice should not be sacrificed due to others offended inferences.

Agree beyond that would nake more sense to everyone and would it more obvious that rape 'not getting consent' is unacceptable, drunk or not.

There is a big issue IMO with bei g drink in the UK. It seems to be the perfect excuse to behave badly and unaccektablebehaviours are then brushed aside because you know, he/she was drunk....

Fwiw too, the younger generation is actually drinking less than my generation was (is??).
So this poster is very much directed to the middle aged people of MN...

I know of a couple of men who drowned whilst walking home alone after a night out. So I do think it's a valid point to remind people to a. not get absolutely shitfaced and b. plan how to get home safely - although that may mean a short walk.

Although I'd have probably ignored the advice.

Okay, so should 'not get shitfaced' and 'plan to get home safely' be on a poster alongside don't accidentally rape someone or beat someone up/mow them down in your car?

I can actually see the one that sticks out here. It's the ignoring consent.
Take that out and the poster is ok.

I never change my opinion usually

I feel honoured, myoriginal

The thing is; the majority of rapists don't think of themselves of rapists. If you had a poster saying 'don't rape', they wouldn't think that applied to them. Because they haven't attacked a stranger in the street or held someone down or used violence. And we know most rapes aren't committed by strangers in the street or involve violence but that's often the public perception of rape.

'Disregard consent' just might make someone think that having sex with a really drunk woman/man isn't consent. Or a woman/man said they didn't want sex when you're pissed but you persisted in trying and they gave in so they seemed like they wanted it because they didn't say no again. Can you tell the difference between someone who wants it and someone who has frozen through fear or pretends to want it and acts like they do because they fear being forced and feeling like they're 'in control' makes it feel the better option?.

These situations are the majority of rapes. It might just make them think twice to think 'don't assume or disregard consent' rather than 'don't rape' which they will not think applies to them. And I don't think for a second they'll think twice because they think their behaviour is abhorrent or wrong, but they might think they'll be accused of rape and not want that.

In that sense It may be helpful. I wish 'don't be a rapist' was clear enough but our legal system and the views of many members of society (including women) means it isn't.

I live in a major city and have been walking home alone at any hour I choose.
BUT I have never done it drunk. I know that if I fall, get lost, lose my bag, try to cross the road, get on the wrong bus, fall asleep until the end of the line or encounter an unsavoury character (thief or rapist), then I will not be able to deal with any of those things safely.

It is completely stupid do put yourself at risk. All the other things are surely non-contentious. You are hardly a victim if you drive rat-arsed and run over a load of people.,

Ask any policeman, paramedic, A&E nurse or Transport worker about the risks and consequences of getting seriously pissed and making stupid decisions. (But no, much more fun to comment on a poster)

I agree thisjust, I was paraphrasing with the "don't accidentally rape". I think 'disregard consent' (and even better if they did include 'assume consent') are perfectly worded. Just not on the same poster as 'don't walk home alone'

If other people wish to decide that something is "victim blaming" or "sends out messages" or this that and the other, that is unfortunate. But genuine good advice should not be sacrificed due to others offended inferences -

Agree JAPAB

It's only good advice if people act on it. What is the success rate of such posters, anyway.